Ruling: IP address does not identify person - Page 20

ApK · 05-21-2012, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ekaros

Build your own router. It isn't that hard...

Just need to know quite a lot of stuff and have access to some facilities...

Maybe you could find an LRP image still out there? I seem to recall you could make a single floppy disk that would boot a PC into a Linux based router. Of course, finding a machine with a floppy disk drive would be the challenge now....

kacir · 05-21-2012, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ekaros

Build your own router. It isn't that hard...

Just buy an used Linksys (a Cisco brand) router and flash it with a custom firmware.
http://www.dd-wrt.com/site/index
You can customize everything. Including Logging.

Ekaros · 05-21-2012, 03:20 PM

But can you trust all the microchips there? There isn't any hardware level back-doors? You are only save if you make it all by yourself. Probably best to use some custom assembler too... ;D

Depending on needs custom ROM, or using old desktop computer with Linux are quite safe bets.

Still, on other hand you can only be sure until your wall... Real paranoiacs have to go with their own internet... ;D Any system is as strong as it's weakest link, which in Internet is quite complicated...

ApK · 05-21-2012, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ekaros

But can you trust all the microchips there? There isn't any hardware level back-doors? You are only save if you make it all by yourself. Probably best to use some custom assembler too... ;D

Depending on needs custom ROM, or using old desktop computer with Linux are quite safe bets.

Still, on other hand you can only be sure until your wall... Real paranoiacs have to go with their own internet... ;D Any system is as strong as it's weakest link, which in Internet is quite complicated...

When in doubt, you can write your packets out long-hand and hire a neighborhood kid to run them over to the destination computer and type them in. Really, the only hard part of that is hiding the kid's body afterward (so he can't give up his routing information to the feds).

JoeD · 05-21-2012, 05:16 PM

You can avoid all the hassle by implementing rfc1149, although it can be a tad messy.

plib · 05-21-2012, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeD

You can avoid all the hassle by implementing rfc1149, although it can be a tad messy.

Sshhh! Don't let stonetools see this. I'm sure it's copyright to Hitchcock.

morantis · 05-22-2012, 03:05 AM

You guys are aware that any effort I put into this was in response to a question asked of me, right? And that your opinions are of little or no consequence to me. If you choose to believe that the router I am currently looking right at is a figment of my imagination or that a service we have performed for around 800 clients over the past several years was really a delusion of myself and my 108 employees, the that is well within your rights as human beings. So, that being said, enjoy lives and we will continue to enjoy our imaginary worlds, of course, if we imagined it all, is this conversation a delusion? The forum? Perhaps all of you are sub-conscience manifestations of some trauma. Either way, have a nice day.

JoeD · 05-22-2012, 07:23 AM

@morantis: Do you not find it strange that a uncompressed log file with 12 million entries is 97KB in size? Ask anyone programmer and they'll tell you it's impossible. Even if each entry was only a single character as opposed to a full log line, you'd be looking at an 11MB file size.

If you don't find that strange and want to find out why that's up to you. If you do want to prove to yourself, then as mentioned, check for the IP suggested, run "ls -lh" in the log dir and run "wc -l" and "wc -c" on each of the log files.

No need to paste the results on here, since I have my doubts over whether you're honestly just misunderstanding something, or simply trolling, but on the off chance you're being honest, give them a go and prove it to yourself. As you say, you've nothing to prove to us, but perhaps you should prove it to yourself.

I ran the above on a log file of mine, 60027 entries (for a period of 30 days), which would suggest a 4MB file size if an average log entry was 70 characters. Run all the commands suggested and you get, 60027 entries, 6061146 characters, 5.8MB in size. An expected and realistic size.

Now, I could be pulling these numbers out of thin air, but anyone on this forum who has access to a mac or linux machine or a router that provides "ls -lh", "wc -l" and "wc -c" will be able to reproduce the exact same results by running those commands on any uncompressed log file. The number of characters reported will be an exact match for the file size reported (when converted from bytes to KB or MB). The number of entries * estimated characters per line, will give you a rough but still in the right ball park file size.

I doubt however, anyone will be able to come up with an uncompressed log file that contains 12 million entries and has a 97KB file size. Keep taking the blue pill if you wish though.

morantis · 05-22-2012, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeD

@morantis: Do you not find it strange that a uncompressed log file with 12 million entries is 97KB in size? Ask anyone programmer and they'll tell you it's impossible. Even if each entry was only a single character as opposed to a full log line, you'd be looking at an 11MB file size.

If you don't find that strange and want to find out why that's up to you. If you do want to prove to yourself, then as mentioned, check for the IP suggested, run "ls -lh" in the log dir and run "wc -l" and "wc -c" on each of the log files.

No need to paste the results on here, since I have my doubts over whether you're honestly just misunderstanding something, or simply trolling, but on the off chance you're being honest, give them a go and prove it to yourself. As you say, you've nothing to prove to us, but perhaps you should prove it to yourself.

I ran the above on a log file of mine, 60027 entries (for a period of 30 days), which would suggest a 4MB file size if an average log entry was 70 characters. Run all the commands suggested and you get, 60027 entries, 6061146 characters, 5.8MB in size. An expected and realistic size.

Now, I could be pulling these numbers out of thin air, but anyone on this forum who has access to a mac or linux machine or a router that provides "ls -lh", "wc -l" and "wc -c" will be able to reproduce the exact same results by running those commands on any uncompressed log file. The number of characters reported will be an exact match for the file size reported (when converted from bytes to KB or MB). The number of entries * estimated characters per line, will give you a rough but still in the right ball park file size.

I doubt however, anyone will be able to come up with an uncompressed log file that contains 12 million entries and has a 97KB file size. Keep taking the blue pill if you wish though.

You actually think that we are doing things of this nature without programming knowledge? Whatever, blue pill it is.

JoeD · 05-23-2012, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by morantis

You actually think that we are doing things of this nature without programming knowledge? Whatever, blue pill it is.

The day someone is able to send me a text file (log or not) containing 12 million lines that's uncompressed and only 97KB in size, is the day I get to save more money on bandwidth costs when distributing all our app data and can skip compression steps and save on execution time to boot.

Still, if you're convinced, then there's nothing more really I can add that will make you change your mind, so I guess we'll have to leave things as they were at the start of the discussion.

morantis · 05-23-2012, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeD

The day someone is able to send me a text file (log or not) containing 12 million lines that's uncompressed and only 97KB in size, is the day I get to save more money on bandwidth costs when distributing all our app data and can skip compression steps and save on execution time to boot.

Still, if you're convinced, then there's nothing more really I can add that will make you change your mind, so I guess we'll have to leave things as they were at the start of the discussion.

Of course.

Shaggy · 05-24-2012, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeD

@morantis: Do you not find it strange that a uncompressed log file with 12 million entries is 97KB in size? Ask anyone programmer and they'll tell you it's impossible.

It's obviously impossible.

wodin · 05-24-2012, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaggy

It's obviously impossible.

Clearly!

Rob Lister · 05-24-2012, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaggy

It's obviously impossible.

maybe he has a quantum router that can log all entries simultaneously in one byte.

Duiker · 05-25-2012, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Your IP connection, your responsibility to ensure its legal use. That's been the approach in the British courts, and it's one that I entirely agree with. To do otherwise is to give an open invitation to piracy (IMHO).

Impossible and ridiculous. If I invite some friends over and one of them kills the other, should I go to jail for murder? After all it's my house so I should be responsible for anything that happens there, right?

05-22-2012, 07:23 AM	#293
JoeD Guru Posts: 895 Karma: 4383958 Join Date: Nov 2007 Device: na	@morantis: Do you not find it strange that a uncompressed log file with 12 million entries is 97KB in size? Ask anyone programmer and they'll tell you it's impossible. Even if each entry was only a single character as opposed to a full log line, you'd be looking at an 11MB file size. If you don't find that strange and want to find out why that's up to you. If you do want to prove to yourself, then as mentioned, check for the IP suggested, run "ls -lh" in the log dir and run "wc -l" and "wc -c" on each of the log files. No need to paste the results on here, since I have my doubts over whether you're honestly just misunderstanding something, or simply trolling, but on the off chance you're being honest, give them a go and prove it to yourself. As you say, you've nothing to prove to us, but perhaps you should prove it to yourself. I ran the above on a log file of mine, 60027 entries (for a period of 30 days), which would suggest a 4MB file size if an average log entry was 70 characters. Run all the commands suggested and you get, 60027 entries, 6061146 characters, 5.8MB in size. An expected and realistic size. Now, I could be pulling these numbers out of thin air, but anyone on this forum who has access to a mac or linux machine or a router that provides "ls -lh", "wc -l" and "wc -c" will be able to reproduce the exact same results by running those commands on any uncompressed log file. The number of characters reported will be an exact match for the file size reported (when converted from bytes to KB or MB). The number of entries * estimated characters per line, will give you a rough but still in the right ball park file size. I doubt however, anyone will be able to come up with an uncompressed log file that contains 12 million entries and has a 97KB file size. Keep taking the blue pill if you wish though. Last edited by JoeD; 05-22-2012 at 07:31 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
360 Plus How to enter address into browser address field?	Hope	PocketBook	15	04-06-2012 12:07 PM
TheyRule.Net - relationships of the US ruling class	Alexander Turcic	Lounge	0	05-13-2004 09:50 AM

05-21-2012, 03:20 PM	#288
Ekaros Illiterate newbie Posts: 661 Karma: 1702090 Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Finland Device: Sony PRS-T1	But can you trust all the microchips there? There isn't any hardware level back-doors? You are only save if you make it all by yourself. Probably best to use some custom assembler too... ;D Depending on needs custom ROM, or using old desktop computer with Linux are quite safe bets. Still, on other hand you can only be sure until your wall... Real paranoiacs have to go with their own internet... ;D Any system is as strong as it's weakest link, which in Internet is quite complicated...

05-21-2012, 05:16 PM	#290
JoeD Guru Posts: 895 Karma: 4383958 Join Date: Nov 2007 Device: na	You can avoid all the hassle by implementing rfc1149, although it can be a tad messy.

05-22-2012, 03:05 AM	#292
morantis Zealot Posts: 125 Karma: 769546 Join Date: May 2012 Device: none	You guys are aware that any effort I put into this was in response to a question asked of me, right? And that your opinions are of little or no consequence to me. If you choose to believe that the router I am currently looking right at is a figment of my imagination or that a service we have performed for around 800 clients over the past several years was really a delusion of myself and my 108 employees, the that is well within your rights as human beings. So, that being said, enjoy lives and we will continue to enjoy our imaginary worlds, of course, if we imagined it all, is this conversation a delusion? The forum? Perhaps all of you are sub-conscience manifestations of some trauma. Either way, have a nice day.

Advert

Advert